我真的不明白接口存在的原因。据我所知，这是c#中不存在的多继承的一种工作(至少我是这么被告知的)。
我所看到的是，您预定义了一些成员和函数，然后必须在类中再次重新定义它们。从而使接口成为冗余。它只是感觉像句法……嗯，垃圾对我来说(请没有冒犯的意思。Junk是指无用的东西)。
在下面的例子中，我将创建一个名为Pizza的基类，而不是一个接口。
简单示例(取自不同的堆栈溢出贡献)
public interface IPizza
{
public void Order();
}
public class PepperoniPizza : IPizza
{
public void Order()
{
//Order Pepperoni pizza
}
}
public class HawaiiPizza : IPizza
{
public void Order()
{
//Order HawaiiPizza
}
}
当前回答
I share your sense that Interfaces are not necessary. Here is a quote from Cwalina pg 80 Framework Design Guidelines "I often here people saying that interfaces specify contracts. I believe this a dangerous myth. Interfaces by themselves do not specify much. ..." He and co-author Abrams managed 3 releases of .Net for Microsoft. He goes on to say that the 'contract' is "expressed" in an implementation of the class. IMHO watching this for decades, there were many people warning Microsoft that taking the engineering paradigm to the max in OLE/COM might seem good but its usefulness is more directly to hardware. Especially in a big way in the 80s and 90s getting interoperating standards codified. In our TCP/IP Internet world there is little appreciation of the hardware and software gymnastics we would jump through to get solutions 'wired up' between and among mainframes, minicomputers, and microprocessors of which PCs were just a small minority. So coding to interfaces and their protocols made computing work. And interfaces ruled. But what does solving making X.25 work with your application have in common with posting recipes for the holidays? I have been coding C++ and C# for many years and I never created one once.
其他回答
以下是你的例子:
public interface IFood // not Pizza
{
public void Prepare();
}
public class Pizza : IFood
{
public void Prepare() // Not order for explanations sake
{
//Prepare Pizza
}
}
public class Burger : IFood
{
public void Prepare()
{
//Prepare Burger
}
}
I share your sense that Interfaces are not necessary. Here is a quote from Cwalina pg 80 Framework Design Guidelines "I often here people saying that interfaces specify contracts. I believe this a dangerous myth. Interfaces by themselves do not specify much. ..." He and co-author Abrams managed 3 releases of .Net for Microsoft. He goes on to say that the 'contract' is "expressed" in an implementation of the class. IMHO watching this for decades, there were many people warning Microsoft that taking the engineering paradigm to the max in OLE/COM might seem good but its usefulness is more directly to hardware. Especially in a big way in the 80s and 90s getting interoperating standards codified. In our TCP/IP Internet world there is little appreciation of the hardware and software gymnastics we would jump through to get solutions 'wired up' between and among mainframes, minicomputers, and microprocessors of which PCs were just a small minority. So coding to interfaces and their protocols made computing work. And interfaces ruled. But what does solving making X.25 work with your application have in common with posting recipes for the holidays? I have been coding C++ and C# for many years and I never created one once.
Pizza示例很糟糕，因为您应该使用一个处理排序的抽象类，而pizzas应该重写Pizza类型。
当您有一个共享属性，但是您的类从不同的地方继承，或者当您没有任何可以使用的公共代码时，您可以使用接口。例如，这是用过的东西，可以被处置为IDisposable，你知道它会被处置，你只是不知道当它被处置时会发生什么。
接口只是一个契约，它告诉你一个对象可以做一些事情，什么样的参数和期望什么样的返回类型。
我在这个页面上搜索了“合成”这个词，但一次也没看到。这个答案是对前面提到的答案的补充。
在面向对象项目中使用接口的一个绝对重要的原因是，它们允许你更倾向于组合而不是继承。通过实现接口，您可以将您的实现与应用于它们的各种算法解耦。
德里克·巴纳斯(Derek Banas)的“装饰图案”教程(有趣的是，它也以披萨为例)是一个有价值的插图:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j40kRwSm4VE
我知道我已经迟到了。(差不多九年了)，但如果有人想要简单的解释，你可以这样说:
简单地说，当你知道一个对象可以做什么，或者我们要在一个对象上实现什么函数时，你就使用接口。使用实例插入、更新和删除。
interface ICRUD{
void InsertData(); // will insert data
void UpdateData(); // will update data
void DeleteData(); // will delete data
}
重要提示:接口总是公共的。
希望这能有所帮助。
